Contrary to what
a friend's reponse to my post on HD media says, I did not indicate that things might be looking up. Rather, I posed a question. Last I checked posing a question does not equate to indicating anything
is. However, I will certainly endeavor to explain my rationale for acceptance of combo players, especially in light of the extremely sparse nature of my original comments which elicited a fairly impassioned and detailed response.
The main flaw I find in Alan's argument is that he apparently believes that there's only one way for the format war to end: for one format to be taken off the market. Would I rather have a single format? Certainly. Which one would I prefer? Blu-ray, hands down. But at this point, I want the war over by any means necessary. If HD players migrate to being by and large combo players then the end result is
the same. Why? Because consumers want to buy one player and know they aren't screwed out of material only found on a competing format.
Is there some branding confusion? Sure. I hate to tell him though, HD in general presents a number of confusion issues to the general consumer. An alarming number think anything on an HDTV is automatically in HD - this has been documented in numerous customer surveys and articles as insane as it sounds to us. Thankfully recent studies have demonstrated an understanding of the need for special programming to have risen from somewhere around 50% last year to apparently about
86% this year. Also, all too many think regular DVDs are already HD. And even many of those who understand the difference don't feel like HD discs are enough of an upgrade over DVD to care. And therein lies the only real problem.
People don't
care. It's not customer confusion creating problems, it's customer
apathy. Alan mentions consumer apathy, but he directs only towards combo players when it really should be directed at HD disc formats in general. Alan cites the failure of SACD and DVD-Audio as an example of consumer confusion killing two competing formats, but it's a bad analogy. It's hard to be confused about something when no one even knows what the bloody hell your talking about. Take a poll on the street, take a poll of your family. Unless they're audiophiles (and audiophiles make up a very very small part of the consumer base), they aren't going to know what SACD or DVD-Audio is.
I know what they are and
I never cared. That's why those formats failed. Not confusion, apathy. For the vast majority of people CD quality is good enough. Hell, for most people lossy MP3s are good enough.
However, HD media have at least two big advantages over both SACD and DVD-Audio. One, it's much easier for the average consumer to see a difference in picture quality than it is for them to hear the difference in audio quality of a music recording over what is currently available. Two, it has an entry route that is finding it's way into consumer's homes whether they like it or not. While many people still don't have a reasonable understanding of HD, the numbers of sets sold are increasing all the time, simply by virtue of the fact that very few standard def sets are even sold now. As the technology becomes more universal, understanding too will come with time, and as discussed above, we're already seeing improvements from even a year ago. With that level of understanding, so comes a proliferation of HD programming entering people's homes through cable and satellite. And after they get used to watching a season of Lost or Heroes in HD... they have a hard time going back to standard def DVDs and at that point they start to
care. The hook has been set. Now they are ready for HD disc formats, when before they didn't see it as big of a deal.
And that is a BIG key here. The whole HD migration is taking time, but it
is happening. It's bound to take time, and the HD
disc adoption isn't going to be a nearly over-night revolution like DVD was. The expense to change over isn't minimal, but it's coming down all the time, as technology is want to do. But we're still in the
early adopter phase here.
Which, bewilderingly, is why Alan feels screwed now. Yes yes, he has a Blu-Ray player in the form of a PS3, and he feels like he's getting screwed by recent deals such as that made between Toshiba and several studios. This shouldn't really surprise him, though - we all know early adopters
always get screwed.
Just ask iPhone owners. But Alan's the kind of guy who already understands this, even if he is not outwardly accepting of it. Again, this is even something he touches on early in his article, but by the end he's brushing it off when it affects him directly. I'm sorry if he has to end up buying another player. I would have thought he would be expecting to in the next couple of years anyway.
When we move OUT of early adopter phase, and people start caring as discussed above, then the market needs to be ready with a winner. If that means combo players are the norm, and people walk into a showroom and the dealer says, "this plays all HD media available" then that's good enough.
Again, I certainly agree a single format would be the best outcome, and my personal choice would be Blu-Ray. But pragmatically, that may not be in the cards. The next best solution is for dual format players to become the norm. I ask you, how do we all lose if multi-format players become the norm? We don't. When dual format players are the norm, we are completely unrestricted in our choices. I don't call complete freedom of choice being screwed.
